To enact sections 1357.01, 1357.02, 1357.03, 1357.04, 1357.05, 1357.06, 1357.07, 1357.08, 1357.09, 1357.10, 1357.11, and 1357.12 of the Revised Code to create a regulatory relief division within the common sense initiative office and to establish a universal regulatory sandbox program.
HB176 would create a new “regulatory relief division” within Ohio’s Common Sense Initiative Office and establish a universal regulatory sandbox program. The sandbox would allow approved businesses or individuals to test innovative products or services in Ohio for a limited period without obtaining the licenses, authorizations, or other regulatory approvals that would otherwise be required, so long as the participant meets application, disclosure, reporting, and consumer-protection conditions. The bill defines key terms broadly, but excludes certain activities such as beer and wine distribution/sales and motor vehicle-related activities from the definition of “service,” and excludes beer, wine, and motor vehicles from the definition of “product.”
The program is designed to identify laws and regulations that may unnecessarily hinder new companies or industries, while also creating a process for agencies to evaluate the consumer, safety, and financial risks of waiving those rules. Applicants would submit detailed information about the offering, the laws they want waived, the expected consumer benefits and risks, and how they would protect consumers if the demonstration fails. State agencies would review applications and provide recommendations, and an advisory committee made up mostly of business representatives, plus agency and legislative members, would advise the division. The bill also requires annual reporting to the General Assembly, quarterly or periodic reporting from participants, and a public website for residents and businesses to suggest regulatory changes.
If approved, a sandbox participant could operate under a written agreement waiving or suspending specified state laws or regulations for up to five years, with possible extensions. During the demonstration period, the participant would generally be shielded from enforcement of the waived or suspended state laws, including civil penalties and license actions, though the bill preserves criminal liability for offenses not covered by the waiver and does not eliminate civil liability for harm. The bill also requires consumer disclosures before participation, mandates recordkeeping and incident reporting, and allows the division to remove a participant for noncompliance or consumer harm. The bill expressly prohibits waiving state taxes or laws that allow consumers to seek restitution.
The overall sentiment reflected in the available voting history is strongly favorable and unanimous: the bill passed the House committee 13-0 and then passed the House 96-0. No committee transcripts were provided, so there is no recorded debate in the supplied materials, but the vote pattern suggests broad bipartisan support for the bill’s pro-innovation and regulatory-reduction goals. The structure of the bill also indicates an effort to balance business flexibility with consumer safeguards, which likely helped reduce opposition.
The main points of potential contention are the breadth of the regulatory waivers, the extent of immunity from enforcement during the sandbox period, and the concentration of discretion in the governor, the Common Sense Initiative Office, and the regulatory relief division. Critics could be concerned that the advisory committee is heavily weighted toward business interests, that applications and related materials are not public records, and that the program could allow risky products or services to operate outside normal regulatory oversight. Supporters, by contrast, would likely emphasize that the bill preserves consumer disclosures, agency review, reporting requirements, and the ability to terminate participation if harm or bad faith appears.
HB176 would add a new chapter to the Revised Code establishing a regulatory relief division and a universal regulatory sandbox program, creating a new administrative framework for temporarily waiving or suspending certain state licensing and regulatory requirements for approved innovative offerings. It would affect state agencies that regulate businesses by requiring them to review applications, assess consumer risk, and report on whether laws should be modified, while also limiting enforcement of waived rules during sandbox participation. The bill would not alter tax laws or consumer restitution rights, and it would preserve criminal liability for conduct outside the scope of the waiver.
The available legislative history shows very strong support for the bill. It received a unanimous favorable committee vote and then passed the House unanimously, indicating broad agreement on the goal of encouraging innovation and reducing regulatory barriers. No opposing testimony or recorded debate was provided, so there is no evidence in the supplied materials of organized resistance, though the bill’s design suggests lawmakers were attentive to consumer-protection concerns.
The likely areas of contention are the scope of regulatory exemptions, the degree of legal protection afforded to sandbox participants, and the balance between innovation and consumer safety. The bill gives the regulatory relief division, the Common Sense Initiative Office, and the governor substantial discretion to approve or deny applications and to end participation, while also making application materials confidential and the advisory committee not subject to open-meetings law. Potential critics may view the business-heavy advisory committee and the temporary suspension of enforcement as too permissive, whereas supporters are likely to argue that the bill’s disclosure, reporting, and agency-review provisions adequately protect consumers.